^ Once again, I think I made my point already for everything you just said. I won't repeat myself and leave it to the willing reader.
I will just comment on this nonsense of yours:
"No, people know those browsers exist. They just aren't convinced in any way that those browsers will be better.
So they aren't the better product."
First I dispute that people are in general that informed about browsers, but I explained that yet and brought the experience of someone who has been developing for diverse clients for over ten years, web developing for five. The real nonsense is your last statement "so they aren't the better product".
What makes a product better is how it caters to the user's needs, both known and present or eventual and future when it comes to actually using it. If the user is afraid to swap the browser because he thinks his computer will break, or if he doesn't know of a feature other browsers might have -that he would gladly use once he's shown- that has squat to do with the quality of the product. That's just misinformation. You seem to think that brand name and marketing add intrinsic value to an object. They don't, they just add market value ie they make an object more wanted by user X, certainly not a better product for X. Apparently misinformation about competitors does also make a product better in your view.
I certainly don't care for a "free" market with your definition of product value and I very much welcome a nudge in the direction of facilitating users in finding out the value of software by trying to use it.
